Im talking about raised homes/townhomes like would be at the shore or on another body of water. Some are lower, but specifically I'm talking about those that are one level raised from the ground, up on pilings.

Some by us are entire three-story (above the pilings) townhome complexes. Nice places.

But what happens when you need to replace the pilings? Not like you can get a new pole and pile driver under the building.

Were these built in a short-sighted manner? I can't imagine that after 50 or 60 years, that some of these pilings won't need repair.

You really come up with some deep, thought provoking topics...I love it!

I've seen msny homes like that and never thought about the replacement aspect. I didn't find any mention of this on a quick google search. Maybe they just use a concrete replacement pole and place it on a concrete pad...or use several poles not very deep in the ground spaced apart to support an equal load??

I know a house mover that specializes in moving homes in the OBX. They cross stack wood until they can jack up the home. It can then either be lowered for moving or left up during piling replacement. We have allot of homes in the area on pilings more for aesthetics then funtion.

Just an example but you get the idea. They can raise very large homes using stacked wood and I beams.

A different approach to the problem is to build a sort of conventional foundation, then build up from there. The pilings (posts is prolly a more accurate term in this case) start at the foundation and are accessible.

A friend in Oregon had a house near the Umpqua river. From what I learned in a brief discussion of local construction with him, in his town new construction in the flood plane had to be able to withstand a 100 year flood, that meant the residential part of the house had to be a couple of feet above the 100 year flood level. The level(s)below the flood height could be used as a garage or storage but had to have beak away walls so the river current wouldn't shove the house over.

It has been reported that some timber piles used during 16th century in Venice still survive since they were below groundwater level. Timber that is to be used above the water table can be protected from decay and insects by numerous forms of wood preservation using pressure treatment (ACQ, CCA, creosote, etc.).

Edited by XS650 (06/27/1101:48 PM)

_________________________Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.

There are companies that specialize in, among other things repair and replacement of pilings. My cousin owned one such construction company in South Carolina and Georgia before he sold it and retired.

There are a number of options, from replacing a piling to using a system that slips over and wraps around the decayed or damaged old piling. Google "Replace house pilings" and you'll find a lot of similar companies.

It's not easy, nor is it cheap, but it's what you'll pay to live on the waterfront.

Its not that hard to do, you just jack the house up and knock the old pilings out, than pour new ones.

They shouldn't be driven in they should be sitting on concrete footings. Driven in would be cheap and could settle if the ground wasn't so great, which it very often isn't near the shore. Although I have seen some cheap [censored] in other states, in my state (CT) things are usually done pretty well. When I go to FL I look at new houses since that's what I build, just to see how they do it in other states. I just love how they build [censored] down their and don't use any of the hurricane brackets or anything that we are required to use. Than a storm comes threw and blows those POS houses down and we have to pay for it up north.

I live along the coast and with the new regs, well actually they havn't been adopted yet but they are coming, the living space has to be at elevation 10 or above, outside of the AE flood zone. Since half of my city is below AE 10 whenever you build you have to raise the houses up, sometimes a little like a 1ft, other times like 8ft. Makes for killer garages underneath though.

My uncle "restumped" the old family house a few years ago. It was an older place sitting at ground level at teh front and one story high at the back (way inland, sloping block). Over 80 years, it got to resemble a skate park inside.

Specialist contractor did it for him, but a lot of people DIY.

My place is ground level at front, and 1 story back, on concrete pillars...house is 60 years old or so, and that's one thing that hasn't moved.

_________________________
Shadows cannot live in the dark.They are servants of the light

Its not that hard to do, you just jack the house up and knock the old pilings out, than pour new ones.

They shouldn't be driven in they should be sitting on concrete footings. Driven in would be cheap and could settle if the ground wasn't so great, which it very often isn't near the shore. Although I have seen some cheap [censored] in other states, in my state (CT) things are usually done pretty well. When I go to FL I look at new houses since that's what I build, just to see how they do it in other states. I just love how they build [censored] down their and don't use any of the hurricane brackets or anything that we are required to use. Than a storm comes threw and blows those POS houses down and we have to pay for it up north.

I live along the coast and with the new regs, well actually they havn't been adopted yet but they are coming, the living space has to be at elevation 10 or above, outside of the AE flood zone. Since half of my city is below AE 10 whenever you build you have to raise the houses up, sometimes a little like a 1ft, other times like 8ft. Makes for killer garages underneath though.

I was watching a show about a beach house in Malibu being rehabbed, and the replacement pilings were made of concrete. They sunk big sonotube cardboard tubes down into the sand, then filled them up. I can't image wood pilings lasting very long, especially in a wet environment.

Yeah you New England guys know what I'm talking about, we get to pay for everyone elses screw ups. I can't wait for the flooding to settle in the mid west that's going to cost us another fortune.

My city has been doing fine since the late 1600's, we don't have flooding issues, but have to pay for everyone elses, in Territory that was French and Spanish when my city was settled.

In some respects, flooding is different. The US Army Corps of Engineers controls flood management on the Mississippi River. Case in point, the farmers in Southern MO were protected by a levee, but the city of Cairo, IL was under the threat of being flooded.

So the levee was blown to flood the farmland to protect Cairo. At that point the federal government is the one who created the problem for the farmers who had what would have been an adequate levee in place to protect their land.

Cairo on the other hand didn't build an adequate levee, but got protection from the federal government.

Once Uncle Sam sticks his nose into things, he just assumed responsibility for the outcome and folks in New England get to pay the bill.

Going along with the CAFE thread, if we stopped paying folks to rebuild if their homes are flooded, another form of bailout, and if we told the Cairo, IL's that it's not the federal government's job to protect you from the flood waters, but it's your job to build a levee sufficient to protect your town, or move out, folks would be motivated to take care of your own business.

We can save federal assistance for things you can't really plan for, like earthquakes, tornadoes, and then only small percentages as it's more of a state issue to deal with the disasters, not a federal issue.